McCutcheon v. FEC

Teaser Image:

On October 8, 2013, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in McCutcheon v. FEC -- an important money-in-politics case many are calling "the next Citizens United." Find out more on our McCutcheon information & resource page.

Landing Page Header Content

On October 8, 2013, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in McCutcheon v. FEC, a money-in-politics case with huge implications for our democracy. Like in the landmark Citizens United case, the Supreme Court will once again be taking on the issue of campaign finance regulation, determining whether or not there should be even more money poured into our elections.

In the wake of the most expensive election cycle in American history, the threat to our democracy from decisions by a radical and ultra conservative Supreme Court continues. In this case, the Supreme Court could take the damage of Citizens United one step further by eliminating the caps on how much money an individual can contribute, in total, in each two-year campaign cycle. In other words, with another pro-corporate activist ruling like Citizens United, the Court would be striking down yet another protection against wealthy special interests overpowering our political system.

Read more below … use our activist toolkit to take action in your community … and please continue to stand with People For the American Way and our allies in the fight to restore Government By the People.

In the wake of landmark rulings in the Supreme Court’s last term – ranging from decisions on voting rights and LGBT equality to employment discrimination and affirmative action – this coming Court term is shaping up to be at least as consequential. Most notably, on the second day of its new term – October 8 – the Court will hear arguments in a case that threatens to further unravel our nation’s tattered campaign finance laws.

PFAW Foundation executive vice president Marge Baker asks: Did you get sick of that barrage of attack ads during last year’s elections? Brace yourself: It could get worse. One deep-pocketed Alabama donor named Shaun McCutcheon, joined by the Republican National Committee, will soon ask the Supreme Court to let him put even more money directly into political campaigns. That’s not what our country needs.

Member of our affiliate PFAW Foundation’s Young Elected Officials Network Nate Shinagawa takes on Shaun McCutcheon’s question of why he is “not free to spend money however I want” -- because Americans want to live in a democracy where our elections are in the hands of the people, not just the country’s wealthiest.

A one-stop shop for the basics of the McCutcheon case – how to talk about the case; how to find McCutcheon-focused events; how to write letters to the editor, Facebook posts, and tweets about the case; where to find more information on policy initiatives that address the money in politics problem; and much more.

Allowing the wealthiest donors to pour more money into our system would make it even harder to hear the voices of everyday Americans. That’s not the kind of democracy our constitution’s authors had in mind; it’s certainly not the kind of democracy Americans want today.

On both ends of the political spectrum, and the middle as well, there’s a sense that the political system is broken -- and not just this week. While there’s plenty that Americans on the left and right disagree about, they and almost everyone in between are convinced that in Washington and in state capitals across the country, those with big money to throw around get attention the rest of us could only dream of. They’ve got a point. But the sad truth is that it could get much, much worse.

Do we really want our political system to operate even more like an auction? The current limit on overall contributions is more than double what average American families earn in a year, and the plaintiffs want to be able to put even more money directly into campaigns? This is a pale shadow of democracy that the enemies of campaign finance law have in mind for us all.

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments in McCutcheon v. FEC, eight pro-democracy groups including PFAW are speaking out on the urgent need for amending the Constitution to protect the integrity of our democracy.

Mitch McConnell sure can pick the issues he takes a stand on. Despite being a true master of gridlock and inaction, he’s been very willing to take steps to erode campaign finance regulations: in May, he continued his long-standing opposition to sound campaign finance regulation by filing an amicus brief with the Supreme Court arguing for fewer federal limits on campaign donations, and last month the court granted him permission to participate in the upcoming oral argument of the case, McCutcheon v. FEC.

Few Americans would argue that they want to see more big money flowing into our political system. Yet the Republican National Committee has asked the Supreme Court to strike down limits on the total amount an individual donor can contribute to campaigns in a single election cycle.

The Supreme Court has announced that it will hear a case that threatens to be the next stage in the Roberts Court's assault on our country's democratic foundations. Shaun McCutcheon, et al. v. Federal Election Commission is a lawsuit challenging federal caps on how much money an individual can contribute in the aggregate during a two-year campaign cycle.